Community Ecology

, Volume 9, Issue 2, pp 193–199 | Cite as

Analysis of spatial diversity of sal (Shorea robusta Gaertn.f) forests using neighbourhood-based measures

  • M. M. RahmanEmail author
  • A. Nishat
  • G. M. M. Rahman
  • H. Ruprecht
  • H. Vacik


The study presents an analysis of spatial and structural diversity of Sal (Shorea robusta), the dominant species of sal forests in Bangladesh by using a neighbourhood analysis approach. The simple field method permits relatively unskilled persons to collect data. Most of the indices can be calculated in the field and the data analysis is comparatively easy. Therefore, the applicability of the method was tested by using different setting of reference trees compared with the full sampling for each plot in the Madhupur sal forests. The results indicate that a group of one reference tree and its four neighbours can be used efficiently to describe the spatial and structural diversity in homogeneous young forests at low costs and in short time. The indices can be easily interpreted allowing quantitative comparisons between different types of forest stands. Sal can be considered as the dominant and comparatively faster growing species than other associate species.


Aggregation Dispersion Homogeneity Reference trees 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Aguirre, O., G.Y. Hui, K. Gadow and J. Jiménez. 2003. An analysis of spatial forest structure using neighbourhood-based variables. Forest Ecol. Manage. 183: 137–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alam, M.K. 1995. Diversity in the woody flora of sal forests of bangladesh. Bangladesh J. Forest Sci. 24(1): 41–52.Google Scholar
  3. Albert, M. 1999. Analyse der eingriffsbedingten Strukturveränderung und Durchforstungsmodellierung in Mischbeständen. Ph.D. Dissertation, Faculty of Forest Sciences, University Göttingen. Hainholz, Germany. pp. 63–68.Google Scholar
  4. Banglapedia. 2006. Sal forest. National Encyclopedia of Bangladesh.Google Scholar
  5. Champion, H. and F.C. Osmaston (eds). 1962. E. P.Stebbing’s The Forests of India, vol. IV. Oxford University Press, London.Google Scholar
  6. Clark, F.J. and F.C. Evans. 1954. Distance to nearest neighbour as a measure of spatial relationships in populations. Ecology 35:445–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Füldner, K. 1995. Strukturbeschreibung von Buchen-Edellaubholz-Mischwäldern. [Describing forest structures in mixed beechash-maple-sycamore stands.] PhD dissertation, University of Göttingen, Cuvillier Verlag Göttingen.Google Scholar
  8. Gadow, K. v. and G.Y. Hui. 2002. Characterising forest spatial structure and diversity. In: L. Bjoerk (eds), Sustainable forestry in temperate regions. Proceedings of the IUFRO International Workshop. Lund, Sweden, pp. 62020–30.Google Scholar
  9. Gadow, K.v., G.Y. Hui and M. Albert. 1998. Das Winkelmaß – ein Strukturparameter zur Beschreibung der Individualverteilung in Waldbeständen. [The uniform angle index–a structural parameter for describing tree distribution in forest stands.] Zentralblatt für das gesamte Forstwesen 115(1):1–10.Google Scholar
  10. Gain, P. 1998. The Last Forests of Bangladesh. Society for Environment and Human Development (SEHD), Dhanmondi, Dhaka, Bangladesh.Google Scholar
  11. Gautam, K.M. and N. Devoe. 2006. Ecological and anthropogenic niches of sal (Shorea robusta Gaertn. f.) forest and prospects for multiple-product forest management – a review. Forestry 79(1): 81–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Graz, F.P. 2006. Spatial diversity of dry savanna woodlands: Assessing the spatial diversity of a dry savanna woodland stand in northern Namibia using neighbourhood-based measures. Biodiversity and Conserv. 15:1143–1157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hui, G.Y., M. Albert and K.v. Gadow. 1998. Das Umgebungsmaß als Parameter zur Nachbildung von bestandesstrukturen. Forstwissenschaftliches Zentralblatt 117:258–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Islam, K.K., M.A.R. Khokon, M.J. Pervin, M.M. Rahman and H. Vacik. 2007. Prevalence of ectomycorrhizal fungi in Madhupur Sal forest of Bangladesh. J. Agroforestry Environ. 1: 27–30.Google Scholar
  15. Ismail, M. and M.M.K. Mia. 1973. Studies on some deciduous ‘sal’ forests of Bangladesh. Ecology of Bangladesh vegetation, No.2. Department of Botany, University of Dhaka, Bangladesh, pp. 79–103.Google Scholar
  16. Krebs, C.J. 1972. Ecology. The Experimental Analysis of Distribution and Abundance. Harper & Row, New York.Google Scholar
  17. Nishat, A., S.M. Huq, Imamul, Barua, P. Shuvashish, Reza, A.H.M. Khan and A.S. Moniruzzaman. 2002. Bio-ecological Zones of Bangladesh. IUCN Bangladesh Country Office, Dhaka, Bangladesh, pp. 54–55.Google Scholar
  18. Pielou, E.C. 1977. Mathematical Ecology. Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  19. Pommerening, A. 1997. Eine Analyse neuer Ansätze zur Bestandesinventur in strukturreichen Wäldern [An analysis of new approaches towards stand inventory in structure-rich forests]. Ph.D. dissertation, Faculty of Forestry and Forest Ecology, University of Göttingen, Cuvillier Verlag Göttingen, pp. 187.Google Scholar
  20. Pommerening, A. 2002. Approaches to quantifying forest structures. Forestry 75:305–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Pretzsch, H. 2001. Modellierung des Waldwachstums. Parey Buchverlag, Berlin.Google Scholar
  22. Rahman, M.M., F. Begum, A. Nishat, K.K. Islam and H. Vacik. 2007a. Comparison of structural diversity of tree-crop associations in peripheral and buffer zone of Gachabari Sal Forest Area, Bangladesh. J. Forestry Res. 18:23–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Rahman, M.M., A. Nishat, G.M.M. Rahman, H. Ruprecht and H. Vacik. 2007b. Neighbourhood analysis of Sal (Shorea robusta Gaertn.f) in near natural and coppiced Sal forests at Madhupur, Bangladesh. In: Italian Academy of Forest Science (ed.), 2nd International Nearest Neighbors workshop. Florence, Italy, pp. 38.Google Scholar
  24. Richards, B.N. and M.M. Hassan. 1988. A coordinated forest soils research programme for Bangladesh, Working Paper No. 4. Second Agricultural Research Project (Forestry Sector), UNDP/FAO Project BGD/83/010.Google Scholar
  25. Shankar, U. 2001. A case of higher tree diversity in a sal (Shorea robusta)-dominated lowland forest of Eastern Himalaya: Floristic composition, regeneration and conservation. Current Science 81: 776–786.Google Scholar
  26. Staupendahl, K. 2001. Das flächenbezogene Winkelmass Wf-Ein Index zur quantitativen Beschreibung der horizontalen Baumverteilung. In: Akca, A. et al. (eds.). Waldinventur, Waldwachstum und Forstplanung—Moderne Technologien, Methoden und Verfahrensweisen. Festschrift K. von Gadow. Zohab, Göttingen, pp. 101–115.Google Scholar
  27. Stoyan, D.U. and H. Stoyan. 1992. Fraktale Formen Punktfelder. Methoden der Geometrie-Statistik. Akademie, Berlin.Google Scholar
  28. Sukumar, R., H.S. Dattaraja, H.S. Suresh, J. Radkhakrishnan, R. Vasudeva, S. Nirmala and N.V. Joshi. 1992. Long-term monitoring of vegetation in a tropical deciduous forest in Mudumalai, Southern India. Current Science 69: 608–616.Google Scholar
  29. Troup, R.S. 1986. The Silviculture of Indian Trees. International Book Distributors, Dehradun, India.Google Scholar
  30. Webb, E.L and R.N. Sah. 2003. Structure and diversity of natural and managed sal (Shorea robusta Gaertn.f.) forest in the Terai of Nepal. Forest Ecol. Manage. 176: 337–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Zenner, E.K. and D.E. Hibbs. 2000. A new method for modeling the heterogeneity of forest structure. Forest Ecol. Manage. 129(1): 75–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest 2008

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. M. Rahman
    • 1
    Email author
  • A. Nishat
    • 2
  • G. M. M. Rahman
    • 3
  • H. Ruprecht
    • 1
  • H. Vacik
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Silviculture, Department of Forest and Soil SciencesUniversity of Natural Resources and Applied Life SciencesViennaAustria
  2. 2.The World Conservation Union (IUCN), Bangladesh Country OfficeDhakaBangladesh
  3. 3.Department ofAgroforestryBangladesh Agricultural UniversityMymensinghBangladesh

Personalised recommendations